U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality > Christianity
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 03-02-2014, 07:33 PM
 
6,824 posts, read 4,899,296 times
Reputation: 3724

Advertisements

What does it mean when the Bible says, "the man is head of the woman?" | Christian Apologetics and Research Ministry

A very good article pertaining to the family order of the Man being the head of the family.

A comment was made today in fellowship with the importance of the man being the head of the family. What does that mean exactly? How does a man execute this role and what role does the woman have?

An example was made elsewhere of a wife of a man that wore a dress that he found to sexy out.. so he asked her to not wear it.. I think this is a good example of how the concept of headship is exercised correctly..

Another area would be child raising.. a point was made in fellowship today about the need for a head over the house and not a "partnership".. the result would be the children running the show.. more precisely the youngest running the show..

Is this your experience? Obviously this is an extremely important concept to understand for a healthy family unit. It's important to understand it how God intended it to be understood.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 03-02-2014, 09:26 PM
 
18,010 posts, read 8,964,135 times
Reputation: 1509
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mikelee81 View Post
What does it mean when the Bible says, "the man is head of the woman?" | Christian Apologetics and Research Ministry

A very good article pertaining to the family order of the Man being the head of the family.

A comment was made today in fellowship with the importance of the man being the head of the family. What does that mean exactly? How does a man execute this role and what role does the woman have?

An example was made elsewhere of a wife of a man that wore a dress that he found to sexy out.. so he asked her to not wear it.. I think this is a good example of how the concept of headship is exercised correctly..

Another area would be child raising.. a point was made in fellowship today about the need for a head over the house and not a "partnership".. the result would be the children running the show.. more precisely the youngest running the show..

Is this your experience? Obviously this is an extremely important concept to understand for a healthy family unit. It's important to understand it how God intended it to be understood.
Nope, not my experience!

Help her to be comfortable with who she is, not who you desire her to be; it's called love, not a possession?
As for the partnership, there would be no need to "divide and conquer" if both, are in agreement?

"And never inform her that you know what's best, she has a mind of her own?"
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-02-2014, 11:15 PM
 
Location: In Sticky San Antonio TX
1,401 posts, read 2,460,914 times
Reputation: 1672
As a cooperative leader, I make decisions and sign my name - she can make decisions and she signs her name. We both take responsibility for each others actions, because we are like minded. And I support her until we have a discussion (never disagree publicly) then we create a compromise and she introduces the new idea. Or she supports me until we have a discussion and in creating the compromise, I introduce the new idea.

As far as the kids running the show? The generational split is sufficient to know they don't have authority over me. The one area I possibly may have agreement is with attire; if I think something may make her a spectacle, I MAY say something, though at the end of the night, she still goes home with me. I am secure in my sexuality and her choice that it doesn't ruffle me when we go out.

I think there's a lot of misogyny based on the writers and the perspective of culture. I think it is a gross justification to go back to Adam and Eve to support such a doctrine. This doesn't allow for single women today, in the day, or across time for that matter. While these may be considered exceptions, there's a large number of the same and it is getting bigger daily. Historically in these cases women returned to paternalistic ideals. I can't see us returning to that any time soon.

But hey, if it works for you, don't let me tell you what to do in your house, behind your closed doors, with your family.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-03-2014, 01:15 AM
 
Location: Florida
5,965 posts, read 5,588,203 times
Reputation: 1584
My thoughts on men being in charge or being Lord over others:

It strikes me as odd that God would put the gender who is prone to violence and has a pronounced weakness for sexual sin in charge. I honestly believe (and there are examples that prove) that societies in which women have more power are healthier and less violent societies. I believe there is something within men that caused them to try to shame women since the beginning. I'm not exactly sure why, but I'm pretty sure it's true. Yet it is (mostly) the males in society who are predators, child molesters, rapists, murderers, war-mongers, etc... So I don't think men in general make good leaders. I think it is the testosterone or that other chromosome called the Y chromosome that made it so. That's what I really believe. Also, there is a scripture about the woman bruising the serpents head and Eve being the mother of all living. Women (in general) are nurturers and averse to violence. Women like things to be orderly. Men break things and burn down cities. Why? Is it really a shame to be female? Or is that actually Adam's projection on Eve?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-03-2014, 02:29 AM
 
Location: Denver, CO
8,655 posts, read 5,153,527 times
Reputation: 3923
A man being head of the wife or family refers IMO to his level of responsibility, not to his authority. Everything Jesus said and did showed great respect to women. And that was in a time when women were little more than chattel. He really did teach equality of sexes, and that was a reason so many women were His followers. And it was His women followers that stood at the foot of the cross when His male disciples ran away. It was women who first saw the resurrected Christ as the disciples sat in gloomy despair.

On another thread there is a discussion running about women being pastors. What a foolish argument when time and again Jesus praised their faith in Him, their decision to bathe His feet and anoint Him with oil ---and the men who criticized the woman doing such a deed? Did not Jesus scold them for their inability to see the worship she proffered Him? Women intuitively knew what was expected of them when men were cowards or short-sighted in their view of the Son of Man.

Jesus was all about love and respect regardless of gender----and that doesn't say much for 20 centuries of so called Christians attempting to make sisters in Christ feel like second hand followers of of our Lord.

More responsibility for men---absolutely, because the most responsible men know and understand the great spiritual strength a good woman brings to their home and families and communities---and most certainly to churches who treat their thoughts and ideas with respect. Jesus wanted something different from men, and that's why He gave men greater responsibility to see that women were treated with dignity at home, in public, and most assuredly in our houses of worship.

P.S. I've been married to one of the best women just two months shy of 43 years. A preacher's daughter, too. I never wanted a subject in my kingdom, I wanted a partner for my life---and she's been everything I prayed to God for in being my wife.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-03-2014, 07:51 AM
 
Location: Mobile, Al.
3,671 posts, read 1,427,805 times
Reputation: 113
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kin Atoms View Post
As a cooperative leader, I make decisions and sign my name - she can make decisions and she signs her name. We both take responsibility for each others actions, because we are like minded. And I support her until we have a discussion (never disagree publicly) then we create a compromise and she introduces the new idea. Or she supports me until we have a discussion and in creating the compromise, I introduce the new idea.

As far as the kids running the show? The generational split is sufficient to know they don't have authority over me. The one area I possibly may have agreement is with attire; if I think something may make her a spectacle, I MAY say something, though at the end of the night, she still goes home with me. I am secure in my sexuality and her choice that it doesn't ruffle me when we go out.

I think there's a lot of misogyny based on the writers and the perspective of culture. I think it is a gross justification to go back to Adam and Eve to support such a doctrine. This doesn't allow for single women today, in the day, or across time for that matter. While these may be considered exceptions, there's a large number of the same and it is getting bigger daily. Historically in these cases women returned to paternalistic ideals. I can't see us returning to that any time soon.

But hey, if it works for you, don't let me tell you what to do in your house, behind your closed doors, with your family.

that is good, but may I add to that. Head simply first. and by being first, comes responsibility. lets see an example of this. in a family, if father and mother is absence from the home for a few hours, who is placed in charge?. the first born, the oldest. Adam the man was MADE first, but not created first. so he have the birthright, or the responsibility, so to speak. head don't always means authority. example the head of wife is her husband, and Jesus the Christ, as mediator, redeemer, and savior is the head, or responsible for us, that's all men, (male, and female). and Jesus as God is responsible, for everything in heaven and earth, and under the earth. meaning dead or alive. if one will notice in 1 Corinthians 11:3 it say the head of Christ is God. it uses titles. but is never say the head of Jesus is God. why?. because Jesus is God. he only used titles.

Now, back to husband, and wives. to further understand this headship. one must go back to to beginning and get it right. yes Genesis. Genesis 3:16 "Unto the woman he said, I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception; in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children; and thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee".
an unlearn man will run with this and say, "THE MAN IS SUPPOSE TO "RULE" THE WOMAN. no, this is not what it is saying. "having" the rule over is different as night and day, as to "rule". having the rule is a permission. when a man and a woman both decide to get married. the woman by permission submit herself to her husband, into his CARE. he have the RESPONSIBILITY to take of her, provide for her, and to LOVE her with his LIFE, and as a matter of fact, give it for her. supportive scripture, Ephesians 5:24 "Therefore as the church is subject unto Christ, so let the wives be to their own husbands in every thing. 25 Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it". if I was a woman, and meet a man who love me so much, that he would LAY DOWN his life for me. yes I would submit to his leadership. because whotsoever he will do, would be in OUR best interest, for he cares for his wife. this is exactly what the Lord Jesus, God, did for us. he loved us so much that he laid down his life for us.

so being a head is a responsibility, and that's nothing to play with. because a LIFE, or may I say two LIVES is at stake here bases on what you do or don't do. there is so much more to say. but I'll leave it here for now.

Be blessed.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-03-2014, 08:55 AM
 
1,312 posts, read 1,082,282 times
Reputation: 302
The gulfs between male chauvinism, complementarianism and egalitarianism are often religio-cultural and difficult to bridge.

Last edited by Cephas40; 03-03-2014 at 09:06 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-03-2014, 10:45 AM
 
7,310 posts, read 4,707,820 times
Reputation: 6314
Don't forget the passage about submitting one to another!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-03-2014, 10:50 AM
 
Location: Mobile, Al.
3,671 posts, read 1,427,805 times
Reputation: 113
Quote:
Originally Posted by daylux View Post
Don't forget the passage about submitting one to another!

you're correct, thanks for the reminder. that's why discussion is so great. if one forgets, or miss something. their brother, or sister, is there to help, or correct. again thanks.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-03-2014, 11:05 AM
 
35,035 posts, read 9,065,016 times
Reputation: 4826
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mikelee81 View Post
What does it mean when the Bible says, "the man is head of the woman?" | Christian Apologetics and Research Ministry

A very good article pertaining to the family order of the Man being the head of the family.

A comment was made today in fellowship with the importance of the man being the head of the family. What does that mean exactly? How does a man execute this role and what role does the woman have?

An example was made elsewhere of a wife of a man that wore a dress that he found to sexy out.. so he asked her to not wear it.. I think this is a good example of how the concept of headship is exercised correctly..

Another area would be child raising.. a point was made in fellowship today about the need for a head over the house and not a "partnership".. the result would be the children running the show.. more precisely the youngest running the show..

Is this your experience? Obviously this is an extremely important concept to understand for a healthy family unit. It's important to understand it how God intended it to be understood.
I am a lifetime atheist, and I approve this message.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality > Christianity
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top